They pipe water from Perth to Kal, or Kal wouldnt have any. They turned back the rivers of the Snowy Mts and got a 2 for 1 deal of electricity and the inland irrigation. Why cant they collect and pipe water across the great divide instead of letting it all run out to sea ? Hell not so long ago we had 8 inches in 24 hours,,all gone into Newcastle Harbour in the blink of an eye. I have been told that water is being diverted from Chichester, which is 100% capacity at present, over to the upper Allyn and onto the feeders of the dam near Singleton. Which makes sense, instead of letting it run out to sea at Newcastle.

It gets up my nose no end to hear Gladys and Co going on about millions for a new stadium at Parramatta. How many bloody football stadiums does Sydney need How about some of that money being turned to a water project that will benefit those that live outside the city ??

What about using some of the defence force trucks and personel to transport water and fodder ? All those vehicles and people sitting around waiting for a war !! Freight costs alone for fodder are crippling farmers. Even tho many truckies now are doing it as cheap as they can, they still have to maintain their vehicles and fuel them, so they cant do it free. Most fodder here in NSW is now coming from W.A. for heavens sake, as there is not much left here in the east. Why not load up a train, or a dozen trains, with fodder and send it over ? Why isnt the so called leaders thinking of useful ways to help, instead of worrying about football stadiums and stupid ugly "art works " to stick in parks in Sydney ? Like Furious says, pretty soon we wont have any sort of crops home grown and will be forced to buy it from overseas. You cant keep increasing the population if you cant feed them !!!

Anyway, back to the RSPCA. The management side need a dam good shake up. And it must be very disheartening for the ground staff to see the courts let people off with a slap on the wrist for some of the cruelty cases they deal with.

There's no votes in it for Gladys AA, only from the poor starving souls out far west......the answer to it all was mooted several years ago, went nowhere......pipe the water down from the Ord River. Millions of gallons every day goes back out to sea, millions and millions......aqua farms, irrigation, hell there are so many options, get the water to those that need it, we could feed the bloody world, this is Gods garden, many if not thousands of farmers would need to diversify, re-train, but by gee, I bet they would. All it takes is a Government with visions, with balls if you like, make a decision on behalf of the coming generations.....and water the garden......it cane done, and without the the input [financially] of 3rd parties like the Chinese Gov or worse, multi nationals.......water is the most valuable resource there is, treasure it, use it wisely.

Obviously 3bm must work for the rspca. Either that has his head in the sand. It has always been shown that they will take those to court who do not have the funds to hire a lawyer, so they give in and plead to whatever deal is on offer even when they've done nothing wrong. <div abp="2876">Then you get people who have money, who starve their animals because they are too stingy or cannot be bothered looking after them properly, and the rspca just shove it under the carpet.

When we had dealings with the RSPCA they basically admitted that to us. They only really get involved in cases were there is a good chance of conviction . Our involvement was when there was an abandon mare on public land near us. Poor thing was skin and bone , nothing in the paddock where she was . All the horse people in our street where taking it in turns to throw her some feed whilst ringing the RSPCA every day. We got Animal Welfare out but they don't have the authority to seize animals apparently. In the end a friend of ours indulged in a bit of horse theft! Took her home and got her the urgent vetinary treatment she needed. Completely illegal of course. RSPCA lost me forever after that incident.

Obviously 3bm must work for the rspca. Either that has his head in the sand. It has always been shown that they will take those to court who do not have the funds to hire a lawyer, so they give in and plead to whatever deal is on offer even when they've done nothing wrong.

Then you get people who have money, who starve their animals because they are too stingy or cannot be bothered looking after them properly, and the rspca just shove it under the carpet.

Dead wrong, yet again, on pretty much everything you've written. The facts are that prosecutions of anyone are a tiny % of complaints - for obvious reasons: they cost money; they are resource consuming - taking employees away from the day to day tasks of fixing up problems caused by fwits unwilling to care for animals they are responsible for and some who simply can't cope for financial or other personal circumstances; they are distressing for "all" involved; and they are for the most part, pointless. Unlike you (that's a huge lol) I don't know what their procedures or policies on prosecution but the statistics and anecdotal evidence (media reports) suggest that prosecution is a last resort and removal and/or humane disposal of animals is their usual recourse.

I've suggested that your previous statement which I took exception to "They would sooner throw charges against the farmers than help them" was unadulterated rubbish and I don't resile from that one little bit. However, feel free to justify it at any time.

From my pint of view I'd suggest that: (a) the stats say you don't have a clue; (b) you are unlikely to know what attitudes and opinions even a tiny proportion of RSPCA staff or management have on farming and animal welfare; (c) you clearly know nothing about the RSPCA's work with farmers, although you MIGHT have heard of "RSPCA Approved" - look it up sometime.

Here's a list of RSPCA Board members. You might note that the SVP is a primary producer who I'd guess understands what drought does (don't we all?) and would be particularly sympathetic to the plight of farmers and their animals. My guess is that the vast majority of "The RSPCA" also have the same understanding and empathy,

RSPCA
NSW is governed by a Board of elected members who volunteer their time to
preside over the organisation. The Board meets regularly to review
organisational progress and assist in supporting strategic development.

Dr P Wright BVSc, Grad Dip Ag Ec

President

Dr
P Wright is a veterinarian who runs his own practice at Goulburn, NSW, and
treats domestic pets, livestock, wildlife and other exotic species. He has a
long involvement with animal care groups, including WIRES, and in assisting the
region’s local RSPCA inspector.

Mr G Hall

Senior Vice President

Mr
Hall is a Life Member of RSPCA NSW and has been an RSPCA Board Member since
1983. He is the primary producer and owner of a family property near Young. He
breeds Shorthorn cattle.

Mr B Pickup B.Ec ACA

Treasurer

Mr
B Pickup is a partner with Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu. His work involves
accounting for businesses, as well as various not-for-profit organisations. As
a registered company auditor with over 25 years’ experience, his work often
requires him to provide expert evidence in litigation matters, which involve
accounting and business issues. He is interested in all aspects of the RSPCA,
and particularly with assisting in financial matters.

Ms W Barrett Exec MBA, B Bus Dip
Corporate Director, Grad Dip IR

Board Member

Ms
W Barrett is Chair of RSPCA NSW’s Animal Welfare Policy Committee and was a
long standing Member of the Animal Care and Ethics Committee at the University
of Western Sydney. She previously held the role of President of RSPCA Auxiliary
and has a special interest in progressing animal welfare, animal care and
ethics. She is also a Senior Executive Governance Manager at Transport for NSW.

Ms S Cruickshank

Director

Ms
S Cruickshank is a Senior Executive of the NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet
and has amassed two decades of experience in policy development, advocacy and
strategic communications. Prior to this, she spent 10 years in a national
public affairs company, the last five years of which she was Managing Director.
Throughout her life, she has been the proud owner of several shelter cats and
dogs and is passionate about protecting the interests of vulnerable animals in
our society.

Dr I Roth

Director

Dr
I Roth worked as a veterinarian with the NSW Department of Primary Industries
(NSW DPI) for 40 years in biosecurity and animal welfare. He managed the NSW
DPI’s Animal Welfare Unit and worked closely with RSPCA NSW. Until his
retirement in December 2015, he was the Chief Veterinary Officer for NSW. His
career successes were recognised with a Public Service Medal for outstanding
public service to veterinary science, particularly pertaining to animal welfare
and biosecurity in NSW.

Mr A Givney

Director

Mr
Givney was elected to the Board in 2010. He has worked as a Barrister-at-Law
since 1987, following his retirement as a partner in a solicitors’ practice.

Mr D Robinson

Director

Mr
D Robinson joined the Board in November 2014. Born in Young in NSW, he had a
varied career before joining the NSW Police in 1971. He served in small rural
communities across the state for 23 years but resigned to take up the position
of Chief Inspector for RSPCA NSW. He served for eight years, before becoming
RSPCA NSW Manager of Branches and Properties. He is keenly interested in all
facets of the RSPCA, but particularly in the branches and their operations. As
an RSPCA Australia Farm Assessor, he carried out inspections of piggeries
accredited under the Approved Farming Scheme. In 2012, Mr Robinson retired to a
60-acre farm in Grenfell in the Mid-West NSW, where he now runs a few cattle
and an alpaca.

Mr S Coleman GDip of Inv Mgt, MBA

Chief Executive Officer

Mr
S Coleman is the Chief Executive Officer of RSPCA NSW and the Society
Secretary. He joined RSPCA NSW as an Inspector in 1991 and contributes to
animal welfare in many ways. This includes sitting on numerous government and
industry committees and advisory councils, such as the Animal Welfare Advisory
Council, including the Animal Welfare Advisory Council that reports directly to
the Minister for Primary Industries.

Mr A Clachers LLB (Hons)

Company Secretary

Mr
A Clachers is the Chief Operating Officer and the Company Secretary of RSPCA
NSW. He joined RSPCA NSW as General Counsel in 2013 and has extensive
experience in animal welfare law and policy. He also has significant experience
in not-for-profit governance and management.

Specifics: I've done a little further reading which is illuminating, and I'd guess very few villagers or members of the public know or understand this. Many RSPCA "branches" are run by volunteers and as such they are limited by resources and law as to their ability to act on complaints. For example Orange, where the distressing case above occurred, is a volunteer branch, about which the RSPCA says:

As this is now a long post already I'll move to part two - a personal anecdote which proves nothing but does give the lie to your sweeping statements; a very big criticism of the RSPCA, albeit from a position of relative ignorance; and a suggestion for bleeding hearts.

Some years back, towards the end of the big drought, my daily commute was past some semi-rural small holdings where the farmer ran some cattle. Maybe 50 or so. Over weeks I watched one herd lose condition until the point that some had become emaciated so I contacted the RSPCA to see what they could do. The RSPCA woman said they knew the property owner and that he was not a neglectful bloke but they'd investigate. I told them I wasn't calling to report him but to see if anything could be done, suggesting that I and other workmates would happily contribute to some feed if it helped short term. Within a couple of days those starving cattle had been removed - hopefully to better "pasture" though I don't know. At other times in the same area local council had put temporary lines and speed advisories beside the road and allowed his cattle to graze along the verge. No-one complained afaik, nor should they have. Needless to say there was no persecution or prosecution of the farmer even though he'd allowed his cattle to get to state they shouldn't have. He was probably holding out for rain or some other miracle.

The criticism:

In the last couple of years I've read many criticisms of the RSPCA (mostly warranted on face value, but we never get the full picture) so I did a bit of reading about their operations and FINANCES (before these latest posts). Two things which need to be said up front: (1) details are rarely found in annual reports and numbers are often aggregated so the picture is rarely clear to uneducated observers like myself; (2) I don't know the background behind their accumulations or the reasons why they are maintained. BUT, large accumulations they do have. In NSW they amount to nearly $80M on an ongoing basis. I didn't look at Vic this time but previously I found they also had large reserves - much more than I expected and would have thought necessary. Given a lot of their outposts are run by volunteers the question we all have is obvious.

Suggestion for bleeding hearts:

Forums/social media are great for venting and sometimes even manage to get something done. However if you have concerns about big organisations and their operations - which you help fund via taxes - then give them some written feedback. Explain your concerns and criticisms clearly, but don't hold back the emotion. If enough do then eventually management and boards will take notice. Facebook often gets a response. The RSPCA doesn't provide an email address but they do have an online feedback mechanism in their contacts. I sent the NSW RSPCA a brief comment and query about their reserves today, it will be interesting to see what if any reply I get.

If you want to get a proper picture of what the RSPCA does, spend a couple of hours reading the content of their websites. Chasing sad cases of neglect is just a small part of their operations. The great pity is that they have to exist at all.

Do I support them? Of course, we'd be buggered without them. Do I support them financially? Not since reading the Vic financials a couple of years ago.

3blindmice I'm talking through what they did to someone I know. I know how she treated her animals and they were her life and also her sanity. Yet they didn't even ask her questions they took. They said they would take any that were ill and said a wet nose meant they were ill! The dogs didn't get feed the day they arrived before the owner had got to clean and feed. They took all day to get them to Sydney. They put down a bitch who was due to have puppies the next day as she was booked into the vets. Did they get the puppies first. They then innoculated them all (all of that was up to date and documented) and are charging her for that etc. They bullied her and she is only just now coming out of a cycle of self doubt and ill health from all the pain she went through. So yes the RSPCA can do good but they are by no means perfect and need to ask questions and look before they leap sometimes also. Here local branch knew she was producing happy healthy puppies. They didn't step in but Sydney wanted to be seen to be shutting down so called puppy farms. THey took old desexed dogs from her who she had raised from puppyhood and because she loved her dogs couldn't just sell on when she retired them. I was there barely three weeks before. I saw the love, how each dog responded to their name and loved her in return.

I know the state of my backyard after the night and morning before clean up. I saw her cleaning and talking about each dog and never stopping because she didn't have time. They have made her out to be a mad hoarder - yet she is a country girl who can't live without animals making a way to live after she lost her family to ill health. She had to survive alot and her dogs got her through. They were a team and her special friends. THey never went without as they got better food than my single boy gets. Oh she didn't have all the things like underfloor heating - something most of the puppies wouldn't have in future also.

So 3blindmice I am angry at the RSPCA. There are animals out there that do need their help. There are dogs who are starved and beaten. There are dogs who are taught to fight and kill. Not these. Most were a tad overweight if anything. They had two vets who looked after them and I'm just glad that is finally coming to think again and know they weren't right.

They haven't believed that each dog had a name but they did. They knew their names and while playing while cleaned and feed and washed bowls there would be a big sweep of dogs back to her and she name each and pat and laugh and send them off to play again. I know what I saw was love and devotion. Far and beyond anything I could manage.

Yet this is one of the people they are taking to caught. Yes they want money for those innoculations etc which the dogs didn't even need!

No doubt their vets make mistakes, as do their field officers Furious. They had to pay a cattle owner $1.4M a while back for what was found to be precipitate action in having the undernourished animals slaughtered. On the other hand those who reported the problem probably whinged that they didn't act quickly enough.

There are too many cases like the one you've referred to. People rescuing cats and dogs from the street until they suddenly have 20, then 30 etc. Neighbors report them because they see the state of the animals and/or the yard/house. They sometimes see that the person can't manage. We occasionally see the results on TV. The animals MAY get fed and watered but they don't get washed, they don't get routine vet care and sometimes live in filth (not suggesting that any of these apply to your friend). Such things can't be let go. As I don't know the details of this or any other case I can't comment on how and why the RSPCA stepped in or why they take a course of action but I would ask why they didn't plead her case before the RSPCA took court action - which is a rarity as the numbers clearly show.

Two things I'd like to know about the RSPCA. (1) Does it log all reports and require documentation of actions, does it audit same; and (2) what are the large $$$$ reserves doing apart from earning income which is then used for daily operations. As far as (1) goes that would be a minimal requirement if I was handing over significant taxpayer funds.

As a follow up to Baguette's comment above I'd simply say that verbal communications and feedback rarely work unless you're talking to someone unconnected with the problem/office. If you provide written feedback there is a record which can later be used if required. That's one of the reasons I don't like online forms. They restrict what you can say AND unless you copy what you've written in their little website window you don't have your own record if follow-up is required.

THey came and took in one day 3b. No checking on her or saying this has to fixed or changed. She had no one to help her or support her. Never even let her do anything. But she help catch her friends to try and stop them being scared stiff - because that was what was happening. Those dogs were petrified by the people rescuing them.

I was there three weeks before. All they saw was old and not spick and span. But a few hours later it would of been cleaned out and all dogs feed.

And I hate online forms. THey confuse me and defeat me. I hate that jobs are now all online. I work on a computor so know the great tool and help they provide but they cut you off from people.

A one lady on the pension is having to prove all she provided for her dogs in court. She is the one made feel guilty for caring and loving and working so hard that a lesser person would of just given in. She had two vets who looked after her dogs. They were not filthy or ill. They had routine checks. They may of had dirt in the ears (some) but so do any dog which rolls in the dirt at the first chance they can! You think what you want. I know she didn't have a perfect set up by city standards. But cleaning was not an issue. In fact I've seen the video put to TV by RSPCA of her dogs arriving after a day in small cages with no food. No mattered fur or dull eyes and some positively overweight. Where was the abuse. They didn't stop when they saw healthy dogs. Didn't think - Have we heard right here. These dogs aren't abused. No they just took and then went back almost 10 months later and bullied her some more. You haven't been breeding and she replied no you told me not too shaking in her boots because of the way it was said. She just is coming right know because she realised that what they said and what happened are two different things.

Oh and I've seen dogs with mattered fur and dull eyes and no hope. So surely they could of seen the difference immediately. They were the experts who said a wet nose meant the dog was sick. 3b there was injustice that day and it unfortunately reflects badly on all the good people in the RSPCA trying to help the animals needing help.

And she didn't rescue expect when people asked her to help reform a dog with bad manners. She is good at getting to the reason and fixing it. She had families of dogs which she could tell you the history of the dog, mother, father, grandmother etc etc. Why this one couldn't breed which she was rehoming - already sold but they took that also even when she explained someone was picking it up. I wasn't sick or ill and they said to begin with can we take any that are sick - she said yes as she knew none were. If the local branch lady hadn't said grab some before that take the lot she wouldn't have any. THey still are looked after as well as she can and better than most city dogs I know.

Oh I wrote to the RSPCA. Didn't get a reply. DIdn't get even a call or email to say they read the email.

One upon a time RSPCA were super, brilliant, new breed now, my Mum was on the lady's auxiliary and ran their op shop, when it was a ONE only......now I wouldn't bother, they make me sick, so I'm in your camp Furious, don't think you're Robinson Crusoe.

Sounds like a sad story Furious and I've no doubt in almost every case involving individuals there is a HUGE power disparity. At least with a partner or family you have backup and witnesses. I've read similar stories about "bullying" from their officers. Although only one side of the story, even if half true they depict a lack of maturity, common sense and fairness. Not to mention dogmatic pig-headedness - which appears to have been what cost them the $1.4M mentioned above. But we don't hear of the 90% which are handled properly of course. Policing of animals is a thankless task which would be horrific for most animal lovers. These may be isolated cases but they appear to pop up regularly which suggests they might be employing too many with the wrong attitudes or not providing the correct training.

Letters to papers often work better. They get read by the public who then start to question the organisation and its culture. Then again the RSPCA might consider some collateral damage is worth it for a high clear up rate and improved animal welfare?

Sounds like a sad story Furious and I've no doubt in almost every case involving individuals there is a HUGE power disparity. At least with a partner or family you have backup and witnesses. I've read similar stories about "bullying" from their officers. Although only one side of the story, even if half true they depict a lack of maturity, common sense and fairness. Not to mention dogmatic pig-headedness - which appears to have been what cost them the $1.4M mentioned above. But we don't hear of the 90% which are handled properly of course. Policing of animals is a thankless task which would be horrific for most animal lovers. These may be isolated cases but they appear to pop up regularly which suggests they might be employing too many with the wrong attitudes or not providing the correct training.

Letters to papers often work better. They get read by the public who then start to question the organisation and its culture. Then again the RSPCA might consider some collateral damage is worth it for a high clear up rate and improved animal welfare?

Oh they do plenty if you call putting down 100's upon thousands of animals in their care, running adverts in the papers against rodeos, horse racing, grey hounds and whatever else, ads that would cost upwards of 90k each time.

Yet you can call, and IF you are lucky for them to even come and check the animals you are calling about, they can be starving and on deaths door, and they are happy to leave them there in care of the owner because they have a bit of muddy water in troughs that haven't been cleaned in years and there is a bit of grass in the paddock!

Yet they will then go out to another case, that the owner has spent 1000's on in vets and feed etc, and they'll give no warning and seize the animal, and take the owner to court.

Each state on the east coast, rspca has at least $10million+ in surplus sitting in their accounts. Then they cry poor, AFTER getting $4million a year from the government plus millions in donations, and say they don't have enough inspectors.

Yes, you will get some in the offices that breed livestock or are vets, but they aren't out on the ground doing the work!

The inspectors on the ground usually have NFI about livestock or horses. You only have to watch reruns of their tv show to see that!

As for your prosecution stats, that is an incredibly low %. Which in itself is disgusting, that means they are letting people who should be charged, get away with it! I know about 5 people in vic involved in horses alone that have been starving and neglecting for years, and the rspca just tell them to move the animals out of public sight!

Another news flash for you. Animals often have to be put down because of their condition, because no-one wants them, and the RSPCA has finite working resources as far as we know. Sad but true. Exactly the same position that farmers sometimes find themselves in. Hobson's choice. But of course the RSPCA isn't the cause of the problems in the first place, they simply exist to clean up the mess.

If you need assistance understanding prosecution rates - the ones you had no idea about when you originally posted - you might like to google and read widely about the reasons. It's all pretty obvious but you still appear not to get it.

Done that reading on how the RSPCA works with farmers yet? Any idea on what the ratio of prosecutions to complaints involving farmers is? You must have that data given your statement above but I'm betting not.

As an expert on their operations though (par 2,3 above) please throw us a bone and give us some factual information on a few particular cases. The waffle I find is unconvincing. Some locational info will help. You can PM me the names of the 5 who starve their horses but are told to "hide them" if you like. I'll pass the info on to appropriate authorities. Do you have tapes of the conversations by chance?

Perhaps you're just unlucky and your local field agents are all bad eggs - or maybe they're good eggs trying to help struggling people who have "spent 1000s on vets and feed etc"?

Another news flash for you. Animals often have to be put down because of their condition, because no-one wants them, and the RSPCA has finite working resources as far as we know. Sad but true. Exactly the same position that farmers sometimes find themselves in. Hobson's choice. But of course the RSPCA isn't the cause of the problems in the first place, they simply exist to clean up the mess.

If you need assistance understanding prosecution rates - the ones you had no idea about when you originally posted - you might like to google and read widely about the reasons. It's all pretty obvious but you still appear not to get it.

Done that reading on how the RSPCA works with farmers yet? Any idea on what the ratio of prosecutions to complaints involving farmers is? You must have that data given your statement above but I'm betting not.

As an expert on their operations though (par 2,3 above) please throw us a bone and give us some factual information on a few particular cases. The waffle I find is unconvincing. Some locational info will help. You can PM me the names of the 5 who starve their horses but are told to "hide them" if you like. I'll pass the info on to appropriate authorities. Do you have tapes of the conversations by chance?

Perhaps you're just unlucky and your local field agents are all bad eggs - or maybe they're good eggs trying to help struggling people who have "spent 1000s on vets and feed etc"?

Just found out that Greyhounds apparently aren't allowed to have bones with any blood or meat attached as it will make them vicious. Who is in charge with these weird ideas. Dogs love a bone and need bones for healthy teeth. If trained right it doesn't mean you can't take a bone off a dog - I wouldn't do that with most dogs but can with the two here it need be. Australia has become so scary to live in.

I know nothing about greyhounds but it sounded like anecdotal bs to me Furious so I did a quick perusal. It may have some basis but there's nothing which suggests the above on the RSPCA website and nothing my brief look found to suggest it has any substance apart from the well-known behavioral issue below.

This is the one piece of (logical) info which might explain what you heard.

Racing Greyhounds

The diet of racing Greyhounds usually includes raw meat
and softened kibble. In some racing kennel
environments it is not appropriate to provide dogs with
bones to chew as this can lead to aggression and fights.

Found a related reference which applies generally to dogs given bones when more than one dog is around (many people will be familiar with this already) - give a dog a bone separately and allow it a private space to do its thing.

I have two dogs here they get their bones and I can take them back if needed. Yes they eat one in the back and one on the bed. Both try for the bed area so it can be a rush then the other just goes around the house to separate. Bones are necessary to a dog not just a want. And no its what has been told to someone I know who has greyhounds. My dog has greyhound or a courser breed as a father and it doesn't get upset by food. Loves the stuff but will let us take it back. Something you train for from the start if you have children around who may pick something up. THis is coming from people who are telling them what to do.

Copied post. Very interesting and not at all surprising sadly. Okay so here's the real story on the 110 Bull Terriers recently featured in the news, a more disgusting tale of woe than you could ever have imagined.
The property owner did not have 110 breeding dogs. Some of them were
rescue dogs awaiting new homes and some were other people's dogs who had
been left with the property owner to keep them safe from the fires in
the area. The fire situation worsened and early in the morning she
crated all the dogs ready to evacuate them. When it became obvious that
she wasn't going to be able to get them all out in time, in desperation
she called the rspca to see if they would/could assist with evacuating
the dogs. The rspca said they wouldn't help unless she surrendered
them to the rspca and so she was placed in a drastic situation and
agreed to surrender them. The rspca arrived on the property and they
then locked the owner in the house for 14 hours, refusing to let her
tend to the dogs or give them water. This included a 2 week old puppy
which was being bottle fed, they refused to let her feed it. God knows
what has happened to that little one now as the rspca were too busy
letting the whole situation deteriorate so they could get the pictures
they needed of dogs panting in crates with no water etc etc. The
dogs included imports and some of the top Bull Terrier bloodlines in the
world. These lines have all now been lost to Australia. All dogs over
12 months old were given to Bull Terrier Rescue under rspca terms ie
they MUST be desexed before being rehomed. The 40 young dogs and puppies
have been kept by the rspca and they will be sold for top dollar. A
nice little nest egg for the rspca, $80,000+ for very little work.
The dogs were all in excellent condition and they were clean, fat,
healthy and in fact could have left the property and gone straight to a
show they were so clean. They all had wagging tails and did not show a
single sign that any had been abused or neglected in any way. The video
of the dogs in the dirty crates was taken after the 14 hours of rspca
neglect had made the situation look as bad as it possibly could look.
You'll notice the video only featured one room and the shed and did not
show any other areas of the property ie her runs, her facilities etc.
I can't even imagine the pain the owner has been put through watching
the rspca do this to her beloved dogs by keeping her away from them on a
very hot day with an imminent fire threat looming. Then to wake up the
next morning and not have a single dog on the property would be soul
destroying. Wondering if the bottle fed baby had survived. My heart
really goes out to the owner of the dogs, l hope she gets help and does
not have a complete breakdown over what they did to her beloved dogs.
The rspca have now truly shown what an absolutely despicable bunch of
psychopaths they are. Liars, bullies and completely heartless, they
should not be given a mouse to care for let alone valuable breeding dogs
like these. So now you have all the facts, yes there are always two
sides to any story, and this just shows you can never believe any story
the rspca tells 💔💔💔

Experience is something you gain a few minutes after you could have used it!

Wait...what??? They locked this woman in her house for 14 hours? In a fire threatened property. I call complete bullsh1t on that...

Now that you mention it I agree. I doubt the RSPCA has the authority , as a matter of fact i cannot think of any organisation that could do that, even the police would not be allowed to lock someone in their house. Maybe a spy agency on the sly

They wouldn’t have the right and they wouldn’t have the means. How exactly do you lock someone in their own home? For 14 hour? And what sort of moron sits there and doesn’t call the police if they tried. The whole things absurd.

I've posted to Katherine Wishart (Cranbourne) who copy/pasted herself:
Can
this be verified? How exactly do you lock someone in their own home?
For 14 hour? And what sort of moron sits there and doesn’t call the
police if they tried. The whole thing's absurd.

And what about the owners of dogs she was looking after?

Experience is something you gain a few minutes after you could have used it!

Forget about being locked in the house for a second, IF they did in fact make her surrender them to help evacuate, that's grounds for appeal. There is no way that would be a legal surrender, especially when she wasn't even owner of some of them???? IF this is in fact true, I really hope this woman goes after the rspca, as well as the other owners.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum